Calling all atheists

reply to post by SuperFrog

Sure, they can't prove or disprove God's existence

Again, not being able to provide proof of Gods existence is exactly that - no existence.

i wash my hands from this, as is clear your faith is strong

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

Earlier you said they were not 'true Christians', yet they read the Bible and how do you know they are not seeking to follow it accordingly?

If a "Christian" is telling other people they are going to hell, they are not following the word accordingly because the Bible says not to judge mankind because it is God who will judge the hearts of man.

A high percentage of atheists are ex-religious. Additionally, you might be surprised how knowledgeable some atheists are in these matters.

Atheists are so much smarter, more educated and more acquainted with the Bible than me or any other stupid "Christian."

Now to extend what you wrote. You no doubt dismiss other religions as Truth, right? Like do you believe the Vedas are the inspired word of godS? I imagine you do not. Have you read the Vedas entirely? Since you're saying atheists should have read the Bible in order to have a case against your faith, I see no reason Christians wouldn't also have the responsibility of reading the holy literature of every religion they dismiss as false.

I do not dismiss other religions as false and have not done so in this forum, nor any other forum. Maybe you could point your questions to someone else or pose them in a forum in which people are debating the Vedas.

I have grown weary of atheists telling me the Bible says something it doesn’t say. Not fair in your eyes? Fine by me.

I am taking a nap from this thread and it’s probably going to last forever. If there is one thing I’ve learned on ATS, it’s that Christians and atheists will never agree on pretty much anything. We’re all wasting our time here, in my opinion. Good day to you.

Indigent
reply to post by SuperFrog

 

Sure, they can't prove or disprove God's existence

Again, not being able to provide proof of Gods existence is exactly that - no existence.

i wash my hands from this, as is clear your faith is strong

I guess so.. probably not worded the best, but just as Randi said in video, there is no reason to do it, the same as there is no reason to prove or disprove Zeus, Apollo, Ra, unicorns, Legolos, rest of LOTR followers...

AfterInfinity
reply to post by SuperFrog

 

I disagree. I feel that when theists bring their evidence to the table, and we demonstrate how inconclusive it is, their destroyed evidence becomes our evidence. Their failed efforts become our case. Nothing to brag about, of course, but certainly nothing we can ignore either. In the end, as is demonstrated time and again, it comes down to a simple matter of believing "just 'coz". And it becomes a "just cause". Ha. But I guess when people are discouraged from being overly imaginative, from thinking radically, they need to get their inspiration from somewhere. But that's just how I see it.

Just as David Silverman has said - just give a kid Bible to read - it will turn it into atheist. I agree, I might have worded it wrongly, which is possible as I am doing 2-3 things at the same time. ( working, listening one of historical programs and in spare time browsing internet and ATS - in short, my mistake for not being clear )

In the end, if they could provide proof for God, we would not have this discussion now, would we?

OP still managed not to answer my original question... really makes me wonder...

Krazysh0t

This needs to be posted here since some people don't understand what agnosticism is:

edit on 6-1-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)

This is kind of instructive, but pure agnostics reject all belief in physical reality - personally I reject such belief due to the problem of indirect observation (ie. observations of physical reality are converted to electrical signals transferred to the mind, then they go through some kind of 'black box' of interpretation. That process is not under conscious control, so we have no idea what kind of process it is - it could easily bias or even destroy information).

As an agnostic I have only three beliefs; I observe, I remember, I reason - thats it, everything else is just an assumption at best.

So I have no idea whether god exists or not, but I dont see praying helping anyone - theres good evidence that Jesus was a fictional construct of the Fabian family of Rome, there is very solid evidence that Noah existed (but this doesnt make the bible true), there are decent theoretical reasons for believing the universe is a construct, I have personal theories that leave plenty of room for a universe size intelligent mind - but there are many different gods and religions, they cant all be correct and it makes sense that they are so similar that if any are incorrect, then the rest of them are of basically the same nature so can comfortably be dismissed. The bottom line for me is, without compelling evidence - I see no reason to adjust my behavior to suit some theory about what god might or might not want. I figure Ill make my own decisions, and if there is a judgement day then Ill rely on gods purported infinite wisdom, mercy and compassion.

Agnostics just dont get much into the religion/god fight because we have a very neutral position - 'dont know, dont much care'.

this is why!

If a "Christian" is telling other people they are going to hell, they are not following the word accordingly because the Bible says not to judge mankind because it is God who will judge the hearts of man.

Not following the word accordingly. Exactly. And 'accordingly' is a subjective take on scripture. Another Christian/Church could take this verse and come to a different conclusion:

“Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.”
--John 7:24

That in conjunction with other verses could justify judging that a person has sinned in a manner worthy of Hell and that doing so is 'right judgement'. This kind of variance in interpretation of scriputre is just factual, it's why there are so many denominations. The Bible is rife with ambiguous and conflicting verses that it's basically begging for it.

“Judge not lest you be judged” is a popular one that some Christians interpret differently. If you look at the full verse (Matthew 7:1) it could be interpreted as the proper way to judge and not forbidding it. Condemning hypocritical judgement but not judgement itself.

Also to point out since you said Bible and not isolating the 'Red Letters' it also very much condones the judgement and killing of non-believers in OT.

Point is. The Bible gives enough fuel to seemingly justify different interpretations as the correct one. To believe yours is 'true' and others not is faith-based.

Atheists are so much smarter, more educated and more acquainted with the Bible than me or any other stupid "Christian."

I never said anything of the sort and I do not think it. You said atheists have no knowledge of the Bible and I merely pointed out that a high percentage of atheists were once religious. So automatically it's a false statement. I also said, rightfully so, some atheists are rather knowledgable in religious topics. That's not me saying religious people are not… I can list a handful of theologians I listen to in debates that have extensive knowledge.

I do not dismiss other religions as false and have not done so in this forum

Now I am confused. Do you or do you not believe Vishnu is an existent god? What about Ra. Do you believe the Egyptian Sun god actually exists? I wasn't trying to make accusations I am asking you your actual belief.

I have grown weary of atheists telling me the Bible says something it doesn’t say. Not fair in your eyes? Fine by me.

If they say something Biblical that isn't in the Bible then you should call them out. Yes that is fair. However, when the atheist points out something atrociously immoral and evil in the Bible allegedly coming from an all-loving god, that is also fair.

If there is one thing I’ve learned on ATS, it’s that Christians and atheists will never agree on pretty much anything.

Also the 'true Christians' not being in agreement with the other 'true Chistians'.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


True Christians? I think that the only true Christians are the Westbourgh baptist church at least they take all the evil stuff in the Bible and preach that They sure don't cherry pick, you see that's what type of people the writers of the Bible wanted.

reply to post by boymonkey74


lol. Yeah I have said that same thing before in an ATS thread for the same reasons. Made the mistake of doing it in WBC thread and got some serious heat from members. Still, I think you're right. The 'true Christian' in my eyes (if that means following the Bible) would be far from being a beacon of light in today's standards. To put it mildly.

reply to post by idmonster

I watched that entire video. Pretty entertaining

reply to post by ColeYounger


There's a difference between athiest that don't give a hoot about what you believe in, as long as you don't push it on them, and there are the atheists that need to prove every religion in the history of ever is WRONG and blah blah blah talking snakes, angry angels, the whole shabang.

The person you had delighful contact was the latter. Don't mind them, they're the bad seeds, as with every belief system or religion has them.

Transitarian
reply to post by ColeYounger

 

There's a difference between athiest that don't give a hoot about what you believe in, as long as you don't push it on them, and there are the atheists that need to prove every religion in the history of ever is WRONG and blah blah blah talking snakes, angry angels, the whole shabang.

The person you had delighful contact was the latter. Don't mind them, they're the bad seeds, as with every belief system or religion has them.

I guess you read what you like to hear, not what is written.

If you better look, OP got frustrated because someone, who he find intelligent and smart and most important - RELIGIOUS - has posted something, and once faced with challenging questions, that is where OP started his rant.

To me it seems OP likes more 'chorus' kind of forum, where everyone thinks the same, every voice sings the same melody.

So, you got it a bit wrong... OP is in that second group, mentioned by you.